The federal government kept Parliament in the dark about $50 million used for building projects in and around an Ontario town that hosted the G8 summit last June, according to the auditor general’s report tabled in the House of Commons Thursday.
The report criticized the Conservative government for not informing their parliamentary colleagues that more than half of an $83 million pot of money supposed to be used to ease border congestion was actually being used for 32 building projects in and around Huntsville, Ont.
The cottage-country town was the site of the G8 summit, but it also lies within the riding of cabinet minister Tony Clement.
“When government presents a request for funds to Parliament, it should be transparent about the intended use of money,” said interim auditor general John Wiersema.
Instead of being used for borders, the money was funneled towards public infrastructure projects including public bathrooms, road improvements, a facility for the University of Waterloo, water fountains, an electrical system at a sporting venue, welcome signs to city centres and building parks. Some of the projects were located more than 100 kilometres away from the summit site.
The auditor general also lambasted the government for how it selected the projects, using a team made up of Tony Clement, the mayor of Huntsville and the general manager of the Deerhurst resort, instead of public servants. The auditing team could not find any documentation about how the projects were selected. The projects were given final approval by then infrastructure minister John Baird.
Wiersema said in his career as an auditor he has never encountered a situation that had no paper trail, something he said compromises accountability.
"I think the government needs to be transparent in its decision-making process and be held accountable for how those decisions are made and with no documentation on how those decisions were made, that is neither transparent nor is there a basis for accountability."
Wiersema did say that once the 32 projects were selected public servants ensured the government got what they paid for.
Canadians first heard about the alleged problems with the $50 million legacy fund, when two drafts of this report were released during the spring election campaign.
The first version, dated January 13, says the government misinformed Parliament to win approval for the fund and suggested the process by which funding was approved may have been illegal.
The final version says Parliament was “not informed” instead of “misinformed” and did not mention the word illegal.
Wiersema said on Thursday that no specific laws were broken, and the word “misinformed” was removed because there was no evidence the Tories deliberately hid information.
Former Auditor General Sheila Fraser warned Canadians at the time to wait for the final version before coming to any conclusions and refused the four parties’ calls to breach the rules and release the report before Parliament returned.
Fraser retired in May after serving a decade as the country’s top watchdog, but Thursday’s report was completed under her supervision.
Ministers Clement and Baird defended their decision to spend the money on the 32 projects, but admitted the government could have done better to make their decisions transparent.
“The money was spent on appropriate projects. Every penny was accounted for. Every construction project was on time and costs came in under budget,” said Baird, adding that the government fully accepts the recommendations made in the auditor general’s report.
When pressed on why the government didn’t tell parliament exactly what the money was used for, Baird blamed time.
He said, on the advice of public servants, he used the border infrastructure fund, which was an existing funding request, to save time because the projects were on tight deadlines.
“If you can believe it, the current process that was used to present these funds to Parliament has been on the books for close to 100 years,” said Clement. “I also agree that it is perfectly reasonable to look at updating this process for the 21st century.”
Baird also said there was no intention to mislead parliament, saying the projects were announced publicly and were up on the government’s website.
“I think we should all be troubled by this. I think we should also all be troubled by the fact that the government is not troubled,” said Liberal leader Bob Rae, after the report was tabled.
“There has been no apology by the Prime Minister there is no indication from the Prime Minister that he understands how inappropriate this whole process had proven to be and how funds that were intended for the benefit of all Canadians were diverted for, frankly partisan purposes, and the advantages of one constituency,” said Rae.
The secrecy extended to overall price tag of the G8 and G20 meetings, according to the report.
The audit criticizes the government for not giving MPs a “consolidated picture” of how much funding has been approved for the G8/G20 summits held in Huntsville, Ont. and Toronto, respectively, last June.
With seven funding requests from 14 government departments, it was very difficult for Parliament to know a total of $1.1 billion had been approved, according to the report. The silver lining for taxpayers is the cost was only $664 million.
“Government should ensure that parliamentarians have a clear picture of the total funding being requested for initiatives involving many departments” Wiersema said.
The report recommends that the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, responsible for how the public service spends tax dollars, should examine its reporting practices to ensure Parliament receives a full picture of the funding approved for big projects. It also recommends that the secretariat ensures that when Parliament improved funds, it is presented with “clear and accurate” information.
The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat has agreed to both recommendations.
Comments
Want to discuss? Please read our Commenting Policy first.